The 12 hour clock can exist as a second choise. Instead of AM/PM, we can use Baamdaad/Shaamgaah, which have Persian origines, or Sobh/Shab. But when you think more about these choises and other similar terms (Sobh/Asr, Rooz/Shab, Ghabl Az Zoh/Bad Az Zohr, ...) none of them are completely compatible with 12 hour clock. Just imagine "10:23 Baamdaad" for the morning or "10:55 Asr" and "10:55 Baaz Az Zohr" for the night. They don't make any sens!
Maybe it's better to follow the Microsoft's choise: Ghabl Az Zohr/Baad Az Zohr (B.Z/GH.Z) or Pish Az Zohr/Pas Az Zohr, where the second group cannot be abbreviated (P.Z/P.Z !!)
Another similarity between Persian and French! In French also there is no equivalent to AM/PM. They use always the 24 hour clock in printed stuff and the following rule in conversation:
00 To 12: matin (sobh) 12 To 17-19(depends on the season): après-midi (baad az zohr) 17-19 To 00: soir (shab)
Sina
----Original Message Follows---- From: "Ali A. Khanban" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Roozbeh Pournader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: Persian Computing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Locale requirement of Persian in Iran, first public draft Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:49:55 +0100
Thanks. BTW, in locale, I noticed that there is no "am" and "pm" for time, and it is only 24 hour time in Iran. I remember two words "baamdaam" and "ba'd az zohr" were used by radio/tv presenters most of the time. Of course people always use "ba'd az zohr", but rarely "baamdaad".
I think deleting 12 hour clock is not fair. We could use the current entries in AM&PM part of the locale in the following link, that you sent me.
Best -ali-
Roozbeh Pournader wrote:
I don't know how you got to the page, but it is about the the Arabic *language* in Iran. The (almost) correct Persian page is at:
http://oss.software.ibm.com/cgi-bin/icu/lx/en_US/?_=fa_IR
(which is done partially by me.)
roozbeh
On Tue, 2004-06-15 at 05:01, Ali A. Khanban wrote:
Hi,
Have a look at: http://oss.software.ibm.com/cgi-bin/icu/lx/en_US/?_=ar&d_=en_US&_r=IR&;
Maybe we need to submit the draft version to correct this. Anyway, as long as there is a note, it should be OK to refer to script as Arabic, though I still prefer something like "Perso-Arabic".
Best -ali-
C Bobroff wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Ali A Khanban wrote:
Well, that has the same author(!), so it doesn't count.
Do a google search for "pashto perso-arabic" to see that many authors think Pashto is written in the Perso-Arabic script.
Then do a google search for "pashto arabic script" and you'll see with
just a quick glance that most further explain that it is *modified* Arabic
script or called *Perso-Arabic.*
If you're writing in English, you'd better not say simply "Arabic script."
-Connie
-- ________________________________________________________________
|| |||| Ali Asghar Khanban || || Research Associate in Department of Computing ||||||| Imperial College London, London SW7 2BZ, U.K. || Tel: +44 (020) 7594 8241 Fax: +1 (509) 694 0599 ||||||| [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~khanban ________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________ PersianComputing mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/persiancomputing
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
_______________________________________________ PersianComputing mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/persiancomputing
